Experts back 'rules' for bug fixes

Vendors must acknowledge bug reports within seven days

Written by James Middleton

Security experts last week submitted a proposal to the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) on standard procedures for the reporting and fixing of security vulnerabilities.

The Responsible Disclosure Process internet draft is being fronted by two well known industry names: Steve Christey, lead infosec engineer at defence company Mitre; and Chris Wysopal, director of research and development for @stake.

Advertisement

The proposal is pushing for vendors to acknowledge bug reports within seven days and provide updates and status reports until an issue is resolved.

The draft also suggests that vendors include clearly defined sections on their websites for bug information, and proposes a standard naming scheme for bug report mailboxes.

Security watchers have long argued that the current method of security bug reporting is disparate and chaotic at best, and often results in vulnerability details being released before patches.

A security group fronted by Microsoft submitted a draft proposal to the IETF at the end of last year which covered the entire bug reporting and vulnerability disclosure process, but is geared towards the discouragement of full disclosure.

The Christey and Wysopal proposals suggest the creation of security co-ordinators to work with bug reporters and vendors as central points of contact to ensure proper communication and testing of reported bugs.

The pair wrote: "The disclosure of vulnerability information has been a divisive topic for years.

"During the process of disclosure many vendors, security researchers and other parties follow a variety of unwritten or informal guidelines for how they interact and share information.

"Some parties may be unaware of these guidelines, or they may intentionally ignore them. This state of affairs can make it difficult to achieve a satisfactory outcome for everyone who uses, or is affected by, vulnerability information.

"Currently, vulnerability release is inconsistent and largely driven from the perspective of the party which has the greatest ability to control the process.

"In an effort to create a common framework by which objectives are met to the benefit of all parties, this document communicates a formal, repeatable process for addressing vulnerability disclosure in a responsible manner."

The full draft of the document can be found here.

Tags:

Related articles

Related whitepapers

Related jobs

Do you agree?

IT white papers

Search vnunet IThound

Top categories

Job of the week

Search thousands of IT jobs :

Search thousands of IT jobs:

Advanced search

Hiring now on ComputingCareers:

Related IT jobs

Search thousands of IT jobs :

Search thousands of IT jobs:

Advanced search

Advertisement

Newsletter signup

Sign up for our range of FREE newsletters:

Existing User

Newsletter user login:

Enter email address to edit your newsletter preferences

Watch

Shaun Nichols and Iain Thomson

10 Oct 2008

7.33 MBPodcast Special: Views from the Valley More...

Podcast image

09 Oct 2008

12.99 MBComputing podcast - IT implications of the banking crisis, and the FSA clamps down on IT security More...

Shaun Nichols and Iain Thomson

03 Oct 2008

6.49 MBPodcast Special: Views from the Valley More...

Poll

Google Android

Google Android

Are you intending to try out a Google Android mobile phone?

Previous poll results

Spotlight

MoD building

Latest data breach leads MPs to demand culture change

MoD admits to losing a hard drive containing up to...  More...

Online shopping

E-retailers urged to prepare for Christmas

Credit crunch sending shoppers online for cheaper presents   More...

Mobile phone

Emerging markets drive mobile growth

Mobile penetration rates expected to reach 95 per cent by...  More...

Digital information

Poor data classification costing companies dear

Millions wasted on searching through clutter, says analyst   More...

Primary Navigation